Not a driver fail, but otherwise probably one the biggest fails of recent times was Honda's last stint in F1. Spending years without success and then designing what would turn out to be the championship winning car and selling their team to Brawn who would reap the rewards. Talk about bad timing!

But if it had been run by committee the following year, would it still have won, or would lack of guidance still have tripped it up?

I see that as one mans* smash and grab over a long game to play for the media

*as in one man calling the shots. I am quite sure every man, and woman, give it balls out.

Not a driver fail, but otherwise probably one the biggest fails of recent times was Honda's last stint in F1. Spending years without success and then designing what would turn out to be the championship winning car and selling their team to Brawn who would reap the rewards. Talk about bad timing!

That and the slogan "The power of dreams". Didn't look like they believed in theirs.

_________________“I'm happy, but there's nothing to jump around about.”

I was cheering for him too, it wasn't his fault that Michelin royally screwed up. I was at the airport the next day when Monteiro and the team was flying out and I can tell you they were still excited, it was like a bunch of high school boys who had just won a championship game. Kind of refreshing to see that kind of enthusiasm.

Sorry but it's a fail. Monteiro appears foolish celebrating and being so smug of his podium finish there. I guess he himself mistakenly believes it was a great achievement to be third in a six car race where the three teams were so disparate in terms of performance that he was only racing against his own teammate Karthikeyan who was never famous for his speed.

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

1. Slick Trick: Hamilton driving into Button in Canada so he could spend the day with Rhianna.

2. That's Telling Him!!: Ayrton's Presser Rant in which he straight up called Alain a Coward...while Alain was not in the room...

3. WTF?: Massa and Hamilton crashing into one another so many times in 2011 that it became a 'race expectation'.

4. F1 Rambo!: Schumi leading a mob down the pit lane vowing to go all West Side Story on DC.

5. Oh The Irony: Webber declaring with brash sarcasm: 'Not bad for a #2 driver" only to end up with a big fat #2 plastered on his car, firesuit, hat and garage for the next 3 years.

6. I see what you did there: Alonso's constant digs at Vettel for his purported lack of talent & ability, met by Vettel's constant praise of Alonso for his purported immeasurable talent & ability.

7. Really, Nobody Cares: The presser fight of the ages between Trulli and Sutil...frankly no one recalls or cares why they were fighting, just that it went on and on and on like a bad dream.

8. Neva say Fer Sure Mon: Alonso assuring us that he would be bringing 6/10ths to the Ferrari party in Raikkonen's wake; only to finish 3 years down by 3 championships

9. Just No!: Vettel's total fail at replacing the finger celebration with a double gun salute at the height of the fingerboy criticism; leaving his fans crying WTF? and having absolutely no impact on those hating on the finger.

10. No He Did'N!: Karthikeyan meets the press, rebuking Vettel as unprofessional for calling him a cucumber, then evidenced his own professionalism by calling Vettel a Crybaby.

11. Mr. Magoo's Wild Ride: Raikkonen wandering off the track in Brazil like a regular tourist around Las Vegas, minus the lights, glamour and traffic...

12. Say What?!: Webber reeling off this little charming nugget in the Chinese GP post-race press conference: "Congratulations to Lewis Hamilton. It's good that someone finally..." DOH!!! In the moment of silence that followed, you could hear a pin drop; certainly you heard all the jaws in the RBR garage drop - but Webber bravely continued: "Of course Seb is in the same team, but he has been on a phenomenal run and we are all here together fighting for victories..." WHAT THE...?!! Another pause, he had his foot in it now...but that didn't stop him from a team splintering conclusion: "Shame McLaren won in a way, but we can't let Seb get too far away, so it was a good day for racing." *headdesk*

13. Oh Slam!: Button on playing Teammates with Alonso at Ferrari: "He is a very intelligent driver and, maybe, in a parallel universe, I'd happily work with him."

14. The New Hendrix Experience: "Excuse me, while I kick this guy": Hakkinen the envy of every adult on earth as he chased his playmate from the presser to throw water on him...

Oh so many...I could do this all night...

Last edited by bourbon19 on Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

True, it was funny as hell, showed that a dedicated racer can plug sometimes off the socket.

Speaking of water, half-fail- at least PR wise- would be also Webber's slamming the glass at a press conference, after he got stripped of the new wing. He had reason, no doubt, but I feel sometimes laundry must be washed in the family.

I was cheering for him too, it wasn't his fault that Michelin royally screwed up. I was at the airport the next day when Monteiro and the team was flying out and I can tell you they were still excited, it was like a bunch of high school boys who had just won a championship game. Kind of refreshing to see that kind of enthusiasm.

Sorry but it's a fail. Monteiro appears foolish celebrating and being so smug of his podium finish there. I guess he himself mistakenly believes it was a great achievement to be third in a six car race where the three teams were so disparate in terms of performance that he was only racing against his own teammate Karthikeyan who was never famous for his speed.

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

This is a daft argument. You could argue on this basis that Vettel should not have celebrated winning in Singapore for example.

The main difference is that with 22 cars starting in Austallia 02 to come 5th Webber had to beat 17 of them. Yes many, many retired but Mark did not which means he and the Minardi team did better on the day. By contrast Montiero just had to beat his team mate and a couple of Minardi's. I actually don't have a problem with Tiago celebrating and I would have done the same but it is a far different situation than that of Webbers.

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

This is a daft argument. You could argue on this basis that Vettel should not have celebrated winning in Singapore for example.

The main difference is that with 22 cars starting in Austallia 02 to come 5th Webber had to beat 17 of them. Yes many, many retired but Mark did not which means he and the Minardi team did better on the day. By contrast Montiero just had to beat his team mate and a couple of Minardi's. I actually don't have a problem with Tiago celebrating and I would have done the same but it is a far different situation than that of Webbers.

It is not a daft argument, you can say - in your own words - that BS did a better job on the day. But for Moteiro it was different, an underdog that somehow got a chance to get a podium, let alone some points, it was cool in it's own way.

There are so many examples thinking about it, the one that sticks to mind would be Hill being so happy in Spa 1998. After most of the field had crashed out and he more or less asked for team orders so that he could stay in front of his team mate.

I may not understand the precise meaning of a "fail", but how can this be one? To my mind, a driver breaking down in a quiet corner of the Monza park isn't a fail. The decision to put this out on live TV is.

It's not so much a fail, more something that he will never live down (the OP did say we can include things like that).

I may not understand the precise meaning of a "fail", but how can this be one? To my mind, a driver breaking down in a quiet corner of the Monza park isn't a fail. The decision to put this out on live TV is.

It's not so much a fail, more something that he will never live down (the OP did say we can include things like that).

I think the thread title should be incidents or something.

_________________“I'm happy, but there's nothing to jump around about.”

1. Slick Trick: Hamilton driving into Button in Canada so he could spend the day with Rhianna.

2. That's Telling Him!!: Ayrton's Presser Rant in which he straight up called Alain a Coward...while Alain was not in the room...

[b]3. WTF?: Massa and Hamilton crashing into one another so many times in 2011 that it became a 'race expectation'.[/b]

4. F1 Rambo!: Schumi leading a mob down the pit lane vowing to go all West Side Story on DC.

5. Oh The Irony: Webber declaring with brash sarcasm: 'Not bad for a #2 driver" only to end up with a big fat #2 plastered on his car, firesuit, hat and garage for the next 3 years.

6. I see what you did there: Alonso's constant digs at Vettel for his purported lack of talent & ability, met by Vettel's constant praise of Alonso for his purported immeasurable talent & ability.

7. Really, Nobody Cares: The presser fight of the ages between Trulli and Sutil...frankly no one recalls or cares why they were fighting, just that it went on and on and on like a bad dream.

8. Neva say Fer Sure Mon: Alonso assuring us that he would be bringing 6/10ths to the Ferrari party in Raikkonen's wake; only to finish 3 years down by 3 championships

9. Just No!: Vettel's total fail at replacing the finger celebration with a double gun salute at the height of the fingerboy criticism; leaving his fans crying WTF? and having absolutely no impact on those hating on the finger.

10. No He Did'N!: Karthikeyan meets the press, rebuking Vettel as unprofessional for calling him a cucumber, then evidenced his own professionalism by calling Vettel a Crybaby.

11. Mr. Magoo's Wild Ride: Raikkonen wandering off the track in Brazil like a regular tourist around Las Vegas, minus the lights, glamour and traffic...

12. Say What?!: Webber reeling off this little charming nugget in the Chinese GP post-race press conference: "Congratulations to Lewis Hamilton. It's good that someone finally..." DOH!!! In the moment of silence that followed, you could hear a pin drop; certainly you heard all the jaws in the RBR garage drop - but Webber bravely continued: "Of course Seb is in the same team, but he has been on a phenomenal run and we are all here together fighting for victories..." WHAT THE...?!! Another pause, he had his foot in it now...but that didn't stop him from a team splintering conclusion: "Shame McLaren won in a way, but we can't let Seb get too far away, so it was a good day for racing." *headdesk*

13. Oh Slam!: Button on playing Teammates with Alonso at Ferrari: "He is a very intelligent driver and, maybe, in a parallel universe, I'd happily work with him."

14. The New Hendrix Experience: "Excuse me, while I kick this guy": Hakkinen the envy of every adult on earth as he chased his playmate from the presser to throw water on him...

Oh so many...I could do this all night...

WTF?: Massa and Hamilton crashing into one another so many times in 2011 that it became a 'race expectation'.

that was great, every time they where on the same piece of tarmac I used to ask the mrs to pass me the popcorn

_________________'There are know followers, there are unknown followers and there are unknown unknown followers' Donald Rumsfeld 2012

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

This is a daft argument. You could argue on this basis that Vettel should not have celebrated winning in Singapore for example.

The main difference is that with 22 cars starting in Austallia 02 to come 5th Webber had to beat 17 of them. Yes many, many retired but Mark did not which means he and the Minardi team did better on the day. By contrast Montiero just had to beat his team mate and a couple of Minardi's. I actually don't have a problem with Tiago celebrating and I would have done the same but it is a far different situation than that of Webbers.

It is not a daft argument, you can say - in your own words - that BS did a better job on the day. But for Moteiro it was different, an underdog that somehow got a chance to get a podium, let alone some points, it was cool in it's own way.

There are so many examples thinking about it, the one that sticks to mind would be Hill being so happy in Spa 1998. After most of the field had crashed out and he more or less asked for team orders so that he could stay in front of his team mate.

Not a driver fail, but otherwise probably one the biggest fails of recent times was Honda's last stint in F1. Spending years without success and then designing what would turn out to be the championship winning car and selling their team to Brawn who would reap the rewards. Talk about bad timing!

That and the slogan "The power of dreams". Didn't look like they believed in theirs.

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

This is a daft argument. You could argue on this basis that Vettel should not have celebrated winning in Singapore for example.

The main difference is that with 22 cars starting in Austallia 02 to come 5th Webber had to beat 17 of them. Yes many, many retired but Mark did not which means he and the Minardi team did better on the day. By contrast Montiero just had to beat his team mate and a couple of Minardi's. I actually don't have a problem with Tiago celebrating and I would have done the same but it is a far different situation than that of Webbers.

It is not a daft argument, you can say - in your own words - that BS did a better job on the day. But for Moteiro it was different, an underdog that somehow got a chance to get a podium, let alone some points, it was cool in it's own way.

There are so many examples thinking about it, the one that sticks to mind would be Hill being so happy in Spa 1998. After most of the field had crashed out and he more or less asked for team orders so that he could stay in front of his team mate.

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

This is a daft argument. You could argue on this basis that Vettel should not have celebrated winning in Singapore for example.

The main difference is that with 22 cars starting in Austallia 02 to come 5th Webber had to beat 17 of them. Yes many, many retired but Mark did not which means he and the Minardi team did better on the day. By contrast Montiero just had to beat his team mate and a couple of Minardi's. I actually don't have a problem with Tiago celebrating and I would have done the same but it is a far different situation than that of Webbers.

It is not a daft argument, you can say - in your own words - that BS did a better job on the day. But for Moteiro it was different, an underdog that somehow got a chance to get a podium, let alone some points, it was cool in it's own way.

There are so many examples thinking about it, the one that sticks to mind would be Hill being so happy in Spa 1998. After most of the field had crashed out and he more or less asked for team orders so that he could stay in front of his team mate.

I was cheering for him too, it wasn't his fault that Michelin royally screwed up. I was at the airport the next day when Monteiro and the team was flying out and I can tell you they were still excited, it was like a bunch of high school boys who had just won a championship game. Kind of refreshing to see that kind of enthusiasm.

Sorry but it's a fail. Monteiro appears foolish celebrating and being so smug of his podium finish there. I guess he himself mistakenly believes it was a great achievement to be third in a six car race where the three teams were so disparate in terms of performance that he was only racing against his own teammate Karthikeyan who was never famous for his speed.

I'll re-iterate my previous point. Was it foolish of Mark Webber and Minardi to celebrate finishing 5th in a 7 car race back in 2002? Especially when one of those 7 cars was Webber's laughable pay driver team mate. I don't remember how Salo ended up behind him in the Toyota but I'm almost certain it wouldn't have been down to raw pace (did he pick up damage in the first corner carnage?). Let's face it, almost every time an unfancied team/driver finishes in an unusually high position there is a massive heap of luck involved, and they are relying on other drivers not finishing rather than doing it on pace alone. I see little difference between Monteiro's 3rd place at Indy, Johnny Herbert's win at the Nurburgring, Webber's 5th place for Minardi, Fisichella's win in Brazil for Jordan etc. All relied on a large number of other drivers not finishing the race or running into other problems.

This is a daft argument. You could argue on this basis that Vettel should not have celebrated winning in Singapore for example.

The main difference is that with 22 cars starting in Austallia 02 to come 5th Webber had to beat 17 of them. Yes many, many retired but Mark did not which means he and the Minardi team did better on the day. By contrast Montiero just had to beat his team mate and a couple of Minardi's. I actually don't have a problem with Tiago celebrating and I would have done the same but it is a far different situation than that of Webbers.

I don't see why Monteiro shouldn't celebrate, what is he supposed to feel? Sad?

Indy 2005 was actually not the most boring race that year. Some were real snoozefests. In Indy 2005 we had a huge scandal, pitstop troubles, and racing for the lead, between teammates (who by this stage had fallen out over a perceived lack of respect for team orders by Schumacher).

Damon who'd done all the hard work and developed the car had every right to put that "suggestion" to EJ

It was about time Damon played hardball

What does the car development had to do with it? So the driver that almost threatened the team is the nice guy, but the driver who was faster on track is in the wrong. Is that how it works?

Nice logic. But we're getting off topic

The car was in that position because of the development over the season

The car was in that position on that race because a lot of other cars retired. Hill wasn't extremely good in the rain that day, he got overtaken by 4 cars on the first start, then he went off track mid way through the race. His team mate was 5 secs faster than him at some point, do you even realise the difference? Hill only retained the lead because of that Safety Car by the way, by doing a fast pit stop. Ralf drove better, avoided the carnage, was faster and by not overtaking Hill he actually endangered his own position, having a fast catching Alesi behind him.

Also, if the developer of the car was the driver who gets the chance to win the race, then Badoer would be having more wins than Schumacher...

Not a 'fail' as such, but often when i think of DC, I recall him sliding up a runoff in Monaco. Could easily have been a big deal

Why does that sound so much like a euphemism?

_________________Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?-Epicurus

Damon who'd done all the hard work and developed the car had every right to put that "suggestion" to EJ

It was about time Damon played hardball

What does the car development had to do with it? So the driver that almost threatened the team is the nice guy, but the driver who was faster on track is in the wrong. Is that how it works?

Nice logic. But we're getting off topic

The car was in that position because of the development over the season

The car was in that position on that race because a lot of other cars retired. Hill wasn't extremely good in the rain that day, he got overtaken by 4 cars on the first start, then he went off track mid way through the race. His team mate was 5 secs faster than him at some point, do you even realise the difference? Hill only retained the lead because of that Safety Car by the way, by doing a fast pit stop. Ralf drove better, avoided the carnage, was faster and by not overtaking Hill he actually endangered his own position, having a fast catching Alesi behind him.

Also, if the developer of the car was the driver who gets the chance to win the race, then Badoer would be having more wins than Schumacher...

Because of the rain? Qualifying was dry and he put a Jordan on the second row!

Damon who'd done all the hard work and developed the car had every right to put that "suggestion" to EJ

It was about time Damon played hardball

What does the car development had to do with it? So the driver that almost threatened the team is the nice guy, but the driver who was faster on track is in the wrong. Is that how it works?

Nice logic. But we're getting off topic

The car was in that position because of the development over the season

The car was in that position on that race because a lot of other cars retired. Hill wasn't extremely good in the rain that day, he got overtaken by 4 cars on the first start, then he went off track mid way through the race. His team mate was 5 secs faster than him at some point, do you even realise the difference? Hill only retained the lead because of that Safety Car by the way, by doing a fast pit stop. Ralf drove better, avoided the carnage, was faster and by not overtaking Hill he actually endangered his own position, having a fast catching Alesi behind him.

Also, if the developer of the car was the driver who gets the chance to win the race, then Badoer would be having more wins than Schumacher...

Because of the rain? Qualifying was dry and he put a Jordan on the second row!

Again, I fail ( ) to see where the fail, in the 1998 Francorchamps race result, is supposed to be found. Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle. Bearing in mind Schumacher's position (which may well have been much more complicated than we realise), Jordan's order can be understood. Having said that, if I were Schumacher (and obviously in that case in the know concerning "my" position), I would have raced Hill.

Where's the fail exactly?

_________________Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Again, I fail ( ) to see where the fail, in the 1998 Francorchamps race result, is supposed to be found. Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle. Bearing in mind Schumacher's position (which may well have been much more complicated than we realise), Jordan's order can be understood. Having said that, if I were Schumacher (and obviously in that case in the know concerning "my" position), I would have raced Hill.

Where's the fail exactly?

If you read from the beginning you'd see that I was referring to the fact that the race finished with 6 cars, following from the previous conversation about winning/getting points in a race with so few cars left.

(...)Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle.(...)

Where's the fail exactly?

I don't see any but the usage of "principle" =D

He explained his principle to the principal.

I have no idea why there's even a question about this. Under the circumstances telling Ralf to hold station was a no-brainer. If Jordan hadn't worked that out on his own then who cares if it took the guy who would benefit to state the obvious?

We have to get away from the idea that every single thing in life can be forced through the merciless prism of equality. (Been dying to use this fantastic phrase since that monstrous tory MP did so yesterday in relation to gay marriage.)

_________________Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?-Epicurus

(...)Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle.(...)

Where's the fail exactly?

I don't see any but the usage of "principle" =D

He explained his principle to the principal.

I have no idea why there's even a question about this. Under the circumstances telling Ralf to hold station was a no-brainer. If Jordan hadn't worked that out on his own then who cares if it took the guy who would benefit to state the obvious?

We have to get away from the idea that every single thing in life can be forced through the merciless prism of equality. (Been dying to use this fantastic phrase since that monstrous tory MP did so yesterday in relation to gay marriage.)

I'd imagine the opposite to be honest. You have a fast catching 3rd place car. Would you let the slow first car remain there, bunching them up, only for the 3rd car to catch up and/or try to overtake?

Granted it didn't happen in the end, but logic would dictate releasing the fast car (so you have a chance to win) and try to get the slowest of the cars to retain it's position.

(...)Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle.(...)

Where's the fail exactly?

I don't see any but the usage of "principle" =D

SchumieRules wrote:

Fiki wrote:

Again, I fail ( ) to see where the fail, in the 1998 Francorchamps race result, is supposed to be found. Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle. Bearing in mind Schumacher's position (which may well have been much more complicated than we realise), Jordan's order can be understood. Having said that, if I were Schumacher (and obviously in that case in the know concerning "my" position), I would have raced Hill.

Where's the fail exactly?

If you read from the beginning you'd see that I was referring to the fact that the race finished with 6 cars, following from the previous conversation about winning/getting points in a race with so few cars left.

I did read from the beginning, but I don't see what Hill had to be ashamed of. He performed well all race long, including qualifying and both race starts. That Schumacher rammed a backmarker wasn't Hill's fault; if "fail" there was that day, that's where to look.

As for Alesi; just like Ralf he was catching initially. But catching is one thing; passing another. In fact, Hill's message to Jordan made sure no speed was lost because of 2 cars fighting one another.

_________________Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

(...)Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle.(...)

Where's the fail exactly?

I don't see any but the usage of "principle" =D

SchumieRules wrote:

Fiki wrote:

Again, I fail ( ) to see where the fail, in the 1998 Francorchamps race result, is supposed to be found. Hill was slower than Ralf Schumacher for an important part of the race, and he announced that he would be fighting Schumacher for the win. That's what he told his team principle. Bearing in mind Schumacher's position (which may well have been much more complicated than we realise), Jordan's order can be understood. Having said that, if I were Schumacher (and obviously in that case in the know concerning "my" position), I would have raced Hill.

Where's the fail exactly?

If you read from the beginning you'd see that I was referring to the fact that the race finished with 6 cars, following from the previous conversation about winning/getting points in a race with so few cars left.

I did read from the beginning, but I don't see what Hill had to be ashamed of. He performed well all race long, including qualifying and both race starts. That Schumacher rammed a backmarker wasn't Hill's fault; if "fail" there was that day, that's where to look.

As for Alesi; just like Ralf he was catching initially. But catching is one thing; passing another. In fact, Hill's message to Jordan made sure no speed was lost because of 2 cars fighting one another.

I never said he should feel ashamed, so don't put words there please.

He was losing 5 secs to his team mate and lost 4 places in the first start. Is that a good performance? He also had a trip to the grass.

Aaah, fudge this, I don't care, it's in the past

Last edited by Siao7 on Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'd imagine the opposite to be honest. You have a fast catching 3rd place car. Would you let the slow first car remain there, bunching them up, only for the 3rd car to catch up and/or try to overtake?

Granted it didn't happen in the end, but logic would dictate releasing the fast car (so you have a chance to win) and try to get the slowest of the cars to retain it's position.

The same 3rd placed Jean Alesi who dropped 7 secs behind the Jordans by the finish?

The same. He's grasping at straws.

mcdo, Alesi eventually dropped 7 secs. He decided not to attack at the end, he said it in an interview afterwards. At the time of the message (Jordan issued the order immediately after Hill's message) he was catching fast.

Quite, although I wouldn't use the word rammed... it has connotations of being able to see what you are hitting. He hit the car that slowed down in a flat out section on the racing line.

OK... He took him out.

The problem with Spa it is divided into slower sections (Bus-Stop to La Source, Les-Combes hilltop to Noname corner) and faster sections (everything else). It's a long lap and if you don't get by on the slow section (during which Schumi was shaking his fist at Coulthard), it is perilous to lap, in spray, in the fast stuff. Schumacher probably wasn't trying to lap him at that point, he simply didn't expect him to slow down in a flat out section, on the racing line.

I don't think DC is the kind of guy to do anything deliberate. He's not Alguesuari or Maldonado. But if you were trying and get someone to hit you in the spray at Spa, doing exactly what DC did is probably the best way to go about it.

Probably the most dangerous thing in that race was Hill swerving to block Schumacher trying to pass him at 170 mph through Blanchimont. Different times. Ballsiest move I ever saw in the wet.